Share

Link to post

Share on other sites

monketsharona 18,341

Yes, her first albums are basic and have aged like bread, they don't seem exciting anymore, while BTW, ARTPOP and Joanne are far more musically interesting and daring, I could listen to them over and over.

GIIIIIIRL WHERE DO YOU THINK YOURE GOING

That's funny because she had everyone excited with SB, probably more than anything else in the last few years. And 90% of it was from her first two albums

Share

Link to post

Share on other sites

Fernster7 7,241

what i mean by innovative is creating something new and never been before, a game-changer

a good example would be PF/DINTD which are more than excellent sonically

But there were songs like those that were created before, they just were not mainstream. I praise Gaga for helping this kind of music to be popular but it's not as innovative as most people say. And I agree that they are excellent sonically and in every aspect tbh but so are Joanne songs imo, and they are better to me.

2

We have two selves. One the world needs us to be, compliant, and the shadow. Ignore it and life is forever suffering.

Share

Link to post

Share on other sites

merlot 5,771

Criticism is biased by definition, critical reception is not a true reflection of something's quaility or worth, you should know that by now.

The reason a critic usually has for not liking her new work is because they have categorized her and expect a certain thing of her that she isn't delivering.

Joanne for example, some critics expected and/or wanted a pure pop album and they didn't get that, but they still hold it to that standard, that disappointment is inevitably going to come through in their review.

While other critics that expected a huge shift in sound to country and folk also didn't get that, they got what is essentially still a pop album, they feel that she didn't fully commit to the sound, that also comes through in their reviews, Theneedledrop's review is a good example of the later.

While if a critic comes with the expectation that she's gonna do pop with the influences of other genres they are certainly more satisfied, and many critics don't get that.

That's because criticism is inevitably based on taste, expectations, classification, and perception, a critic can never give an objective review of a piece of media because that simply doesn't exist.

that doesn't make sense to me

expecting something has nothing to do with it

if it's another artist who released Joanne then you would all have dragged them to filth

Share

Link to post

Share on other sites

Pop Fan 9

when i listen to songs like poker face, paparazzi or bad romance it's a honestly a spiritual experience, she really made something completely innovative and iconic with the first three albums, but with ARTPOP and Joanne i don't feel the same way (and i'm not referring to genres or anything) Joanne was cute at first but it really aged like milk, i don't know is it just me or does anyone else feel the same way?

what y'all think?

Please, correct your english. The right way to make this question would be: Is Gaga's Music Innovative And Exciting Yet?

Share

Link to post

Share on other sites

Leeo 1,988

You can't say The Fame Monster aged "bad". You listen to a song like Dance in the dark and it sound unique and totally "NEW". Don't "mess" the fact that u as a fan listen to a song 100x times more than the general public.

The Fame Monster & Born This Way are albums that u could play now and then 10 years in the future and people will hear and think "wow I would love if she did this again". Because it's GOOD. That's why people ask for "A NEW BTW" "NEW TFM"... these songs are...unique.

ARTPOP was "halfway" there. You have songs like Aura, Sexxx Dreams, G.U.Y..... you can't call them just "GENERIC EDM TRACKS" because they're not. I mean, Aura & G.U.Y. lyrics are actually smart as f*ck. I never in my entire life would think of something like "G.U.Y. (GIRL UNDER YOU)". Aura is full of references and crypt lyrics from the intro to the last words in the song aka "ART POP". I really think of Sexxx Dreams as a masterpiece too. U can prefer the "iTunes festival version" or "the album version" or whatever version u want but U can't deny how the song is amazing. The lyrics, the concept... the whole thing is hot. And it's not like we had anyone singing about... "Sex dreams"... ever ?? idk any song with the same "theme". Other highlights: ARTPOP (song), Do What u Want... and even a "silly track" like MANiCURE is actually really interesting and "innovative". It was a "concept"... MANiCURE\MANiCURE... it's a "smart" play.

Joanne is good, but if you check the lyrics and production, it's just that... it's something that someone else could do too. It feels "Universal" tho. It's not a bad thing, it's just that... as a "Stripped-down-record" it doesn't have the "LADY GAGA" factor that people are usually accustomed. It's not "SHOOKING" or "CONTROVERSIAL".

Answering the questions:

Innovative, right now? No at all. But if you check inside her own discography and listen to something like Joanne, it will sound different and suddenly innovative from someone that came from 4 records infused with Dance\Electronic Pop.

But it will always be exciting... I'll always want to watch her next step and I'll always freak the f out with lead singles, album leaks and etc...

Share

Link to post

Share on other sites

Edonis 17,402

Criticism is biased by definition, critical reception is not a true reflection of something's quaility or worth, you should know that by now.

The reason a critic usually has for not liking her new work is because they have categorized her and expect a certain thing of her that she isn't delivering.

Joanne for example, some critics expected and/or wanted a pure pop album and they didn't get that, but they still hold it to that standard, that disappointment is inevitably going to come through in their review.

While other critics that expected a huge shift in sound to country and folk also didn't get that, they got what is essentially still a pop album, they feel that she didn't fully commit to the sound, that also comes through in their reviews, Theneedledrop's review is a good example of the later.

While if a critic comes with the expectation that she's gonna do pop with the influences of other genres they are certainly more satisfied, and many critics don't get that.

That's because criticism is inevitably based on taste, expectations, classification, and perception, a critic can never give an objective review of a piece of media because that simply doesn't exist.

I agree with everything your saying about critics and their prior expectations affecting their judgements, etc. But there are surely still some forms of unbiased criticisms, even now with some of the reviews of Joanne. Yes, a large portion was unfair in their assessments, but there were still reviews that were fair and honest. I'm just asking because albums like The Fame Monster were seen as an unexpected shift in what was expected of her work; and yet it was brought with critical acclaim upon first reception by critics across the board. Now this certainly isn't as dramatic as a shift from EDM pop to Americana music, but in a sincere question, why is that any different from reviews of TFM verses Joanne? And to answer the OP, I still think Gaga is still insanely creative and innovative and Joanne is a different form of innovation. It may not be immediate to everyone but it is there more or less.

ARTGOD 838

if it's another artist who released Joanne then you would all have dragged them to filth

That is not true.

For you to be able to criticize something you gotta have a framework to work with: the music landscape, the artist's previous work, and what it's trying to be.

Joanne coming from other artist would have a wildly different response, and it depends on who we are talking about.

A cute example, let's say a rock artist has delivered masterpiece after masterpiece and one day they choose to deliver a good pop album.

The critics are gonna have a negative response, because that artist did not meet expectations, they did not deliver rock, they did not deliver a masterpiece. They are gonna come with arguments about selling out and similar things.

Let's say a mediocre pop girl has delivered mindless disposable bops her whole career and she once day releases that same album, she's gonna be praised, saying she's growing as an artist and what not.

That's why criticism is biased, it depends on taste, experience, expectations and many other factors, a critic CANNOT be objective, it's impossible, and they are affected by many factors that are open to change in the future, that's why the perception of a piece of media can change over time and depending on who you ask.

For everyone, that 55 on metacritic your fave got does not and will not define the album nor the artist in any way.